changes because we have the land and how do we take it to the next level? those are some of the things i want us to start thinking with is the san francisco housing authority and the mayor's office of housing and trying to put ourselves together to do that with rad and hope sf will be addressing properties like west side courts that could benefit from being built housing and mixed income. >> alice griffith. is the perfect example we're building the units and no displacement and the residents will be moving to the newer units and having their own priority at the units is wonderful i want to make sure and remind people of plaza east where i grew up. 300 units

removed and only 200 rebuilt. that was a huge mistake where there could have been an incredible opportunity. i want us to think about those sorts of things moving forward and taking advantage of properties that provide housing opportunities for people. >> thank you very much. a couple questions for you garcia if you can come up and for you colleen don't go too far. with health care is there something people can be doing right now. >> yes they should be continuing to come to care that is the most important thing one of the initiatives i will be working on hard is hepsi right now with

medication that eliminates hepsi you don't get that much in health care to eliminate that disease and working with the health plan to ensure those seeking that kind of care that is one time medication they can and that hepsi will go away then when you think about the cloud of sanctuary and make people feel safe to come to care that is one of the areas we will communicate and sent out flyers to all of our clients to continue to come into care and working with the providers to do that. that is part of what we need to do in bringing the entities together in terms of all of the providers to really make people feel continue to come and in the next two years we do a lot of service and care as you know preventative care is one of the most important things we can do on tuesday we had a

conversation about fluoride and also issues of trying to get to little kids and putting flour i'd when you talked about denial care that will impact future generation those are things we have to focus on we don't want people to be fearful of coming into care we need to work on immediately. >> for what reason it wouldn't be fearful. >> sanctuary city. that is part of the urban ewe fearful taking public benefit they might not have care now because of the confusion in the conversation. >> what have you done or we done as a city to communicate those -. >> we have done a campaign it's safe to come here communicating to patients how important it is to come to care. we're working with the mayor's office with cbo's and providers to ensure

there is safe coming in as you know the city has passed a sanctuary law. that is for certain immigrant population for the entire community it's important for us to continue to talk about continuing to come to care. >> here's a hypothetical one if congress were able to get their act together and were able to pass the american health care act, how would that impact people immediately? >> first of all, it won't be seen until 2020. >> so there is no immediate. >> right. >> then it goes to the state. that's what we will have to advocate at the next level there will be a cap on resources medicaid will be impacted and we will have to work closely with the state we are working with

michel cap that have mills at stake and having conversations with los angeles this week to have the conversation what we're going to do with the state piece in terms of what strategies they're looking at for 100,000. >> we quantum fide millions would be left out in the cold how do you quantify that? do you have any idea what it would cost the city and county of san francisco should this measure go forward we know that 125 million is part of what we get for the medicaid expansion we're using that data, that base it depends on what the state does and if they reduce the match for us or reduce services of that 125 hl there would be a portion of that impacted. so when the legislation gets passed, what is the time gap between legislation

passing and the city of san francisco needing to begin to pay? >> it would be 2020 and potentially passed that because we will still have to see legislation that will come from california as to how they're going to organize their system. so we do have a couple years our strategy right now is document, bill efficiently, increase the revenue we have, see if we can do reserves to ensure we do have reserved for these cuts and continue to help people come into care, come into preventive care stay within their medical home at the same time we are working with medicals locally and the inshurd sured and before aca and with everyone. >> thank you garcia i want to call up mr. chew a couple questions on block grant you see

over that program, right? >> yes so needles to say you send out a letter to nonprofit organizations explaining their cdbg grants were not going to be extended no? >> no. we didn't send a letter. because we will have money through the current formula allocation that will be in place for 1718 this impact will not hit until july of 28y. >> a lot of the impacts we're looking at will start in next fiscal year is that right. >> yes july 2018 to june 2019 when is the cut will hit our city. >> our portfolio and the department of public health in 2020 we just heard.

>> correct. >> what can the nonprofits do now to stabilize themselves for the impending or potential hit. >> i think the minute the skinny budget came out, we have begun to strategize how do we work with cbo's to put them in the best position. we have a number of our addiction defense efforts are funded through this akin to director garcia's preventative work if we prevent hundreds of evictions through funds and lose that ability the cost become intense these folks are homeless or moving out of the city we don't want that to happen we had some conversations with some of the entities for example we had a recent conversation with the new director of equity of northern california grant makers that is the umbrella

organization of philanthropy we talked the day aphrodite skinny budget came out how is private fill anthro pea - however i feel they're in a - they may be able to weather that cut and smaller organizations who do rely on our funds what we like to do is

partner with philanthropy to figure out what they can do to better put themselves in a place to access nongovernmental sources it's highly unlikely in the worst case scenario we're able to $514 million for the city we can liverage other sources in brief i would say one of the primary efforts is work with the organizations identify the ones that need assistance and not take those cuts and put them in place to access those other dollars more effectively. >> i appreciate the thoughtful answer. supervisor fewer has a question for you. turn your mic on. >> so sorry. so, this is really frightening actually as we look

at proposed skinny budget and within one hour getting bombarded with all of the possible cuts. to me, the elimination of the block grants it's terrible, but the amount i fool like some of it could be absorbed a little bit from our general fund or as you said maybe some of the organizations that are larger might be able to, i just feel after the last hit many cbo's went under they couldn't survive it. with the increasing rends for them they're having a hard time, too. what frightens me the most are budgets that are heavily depend ant on the federal funding personally i'm terrified about the cuts to the epa because it's not just us, it's the whole world. it's the future

generation which is so frightening. but i'm thinking that with the block grants, that is the one that is coming so immediately because as we heard from garcia that is 2020 times for the state. although, that is such a huge percentage of the public health budget. that is so frightening i feel like with the block grants we might be able to do something that is because it's 16 million, so crazy i'm talking like $160 but 60 mile we may be able to absorb it. what i wanted to ask the controller if he's here still, tank you, is you mentioned by may , we will know a little bit more about the skinny budget and what is really serious and what is not so serious because they're going to

be bantering and back and forth and trading and this and that i have never been through a budget cycle in the city so my question to you is, does that give us enough time to adjust our budget to prepare for the cuts we think will be immediate and the most painful? >> supervisors what happen in may and early june the president will release detailed budget and remace skinny with a full budget from the president we can use that to estimate the impacts if that's adopted we won't know whether that budget is adopted at the federal level that is action by congress to approve. that action will stretch for months after that. well passed the time line we will be

adopting a budget locally we will have a better sense of what impacts could look like at that point from the federal budget cuts but we won't know xa exactly will so the mayor and the board should be considering how you deal with that adversity or uncertainty in this years a's budget process the city has used in the past strategy of creating reserved or allowances where we don't know the specific reductions but have an order of magnitude the losses set aside money as you know about specific cuts later it will reduce your requirement to reopen the budget and make cuts on the fly. >> when we had a bad budget time at the school district and much smaller level, i know, we did set aside a reserve. it was hard

to do actually but we anticipated a bad couple of years not just one year but a couple of years they were bad you remember we had to send 700 lay off notices which is painful. that is good advice thank you very much. >> thank you mr. chew for your presentation and to all of the department heads that participates thank you very much. we will see you soon. this is only the beginning. okay colleagues is there last minute discussion? we need to take public comment. if there is public comment do so, come on up. welcome. >> hello i'm dena lawn for policy and advocate at the san francisco consortium and here to talk briefly about our role in providing health care for our mainly lower income san

franciscoians. i want to emphasize we worked closely with the san francisco department of public health we have been sharing information about what makes our department share most of the patients are hospitalized at the agenda in terms of primary care we serve 100,000 patients. that is over 1/10 of san francisco's population we're nonprofit we're independent of the city we don't get a lot of city funds we work closely in our networks most of our money, most of our revenue come father-son the federal and state government for medical we have done a great job enrolling in medical which is great unless the federal government retreats from this. we also have something called the 330 health grant which gives basic money to the nonprofit community health centers. that is up about 70% of

our funds are up in september of this year we're going to washington to fight for those. i'm here to say it's a tremendous impact even though it's not tral funds and not give up the fight on the federal side and work closely together on the state side. our first fight is to preserve as much medicaid and funding at the federal level if it goes to the state we got to work with the state to keep the expansion that's what keeps the primary care going. >> i assure you, we are not giving up a fight. if there is anyone one else come on up so we can hear from you. >> good afternoon. i'm richard i'm the executive director of conner house. i want to thank you for the discussion you have had this afternoon i want to say

quickly my organization is part of several other local provider groups nonprofit organizations the human services network, the support of housing provider network choo choo so all of us who are watching what is going on down over the horizon in our funding streams are the same things you have been talking about. a lot of us have more immediate things happening now where the business community is reading the paper and when we go to reapply for credit facilities at our bank, even when we have a conversation with one city department that's depend ant on assuring continuity of funding for long term projects they're not necessarily communicating with one another we have a great need for looking at business continuity where decisions are

being made now that effect our long term regulatory agreements on housing building we own credit facilities that allow them to operate the time line in which contracts get renewed and outside funding sources and donors and granters ask questions about viability we need to answer those questions they have and many times w efind ourselves saying, well, you we need to talk to the city. the city needs to give reassurance to people we do business with and those things are actually in front of us right now. i also want to commend the department of public health for issuing rfp's. [speaking off the mic]. >> thank you very much for your comments. and to the public that stayed for this hearing we appreciate you. public comment is closed at this time. all

right. may i have a motion to file this? >> yes i make a motion to file this. >> thank you. i will second that motion. mr. clerk will take that without objection. is there any other business before this body. >> that completes the business for today. >> thank you. this meeting is adjourned.

>> all right. good afternoon, everybody welcome to the board of supervisors land use and transportation committee meeting for monday, march 20, 2017, my name is mark farrell i'll be chairing this committee and joined by supervisor peskin sitting for supervisor tang we have supervisor jane kim want to thank adrian and phil jackson for covering this meeting and mr. victor young mr. clerk, any announcements? >> on the mayor 28 agenda oracles. >> okay just to be clear shall

we be choosing supervisor tang. >> make a motion at your discretion and supervisor kim and seconded by supervisor peskin 0 without objection item one please item one ordinance for the downtown support special use district to authorize a contribution in-lieu fee to satisfy the open space requirement excludes feature fraefrnz from the gross square and spent foreign the lighting on victoria manolo draves park okay. thank you this was sponsored by supervisor kim i'm going to turn it over to her. >> thank you chair farrell the international congressional hotel approaches my office as privately owned public space in the hotel on the 4 and 6 floor are their interesting in figuring out an alternative for

low usage by the public given the floor and offered their interests in renting out this space for private use when the popo was required on the abruptly congressional hotel during a time he we were go developing a concept of a usable and privately open space this was one of the bad examples of a popo and wanted to work to figure out a way they can either fee out or found on alternative shugs space in district 68 as you may know district 6 has a few it and smaultd parks in the city of san francisco and second only narrowly beating district 3 supervisor peskin and so parks and open space are incredibly important to the neighborhoods in the south of market and the tenderloin

we spent the last 3 years working on a proper solution to this issue exploring a number of alleyways we can merit into open space and finally after years the community outreach realizing after speaking with the community month folks want existing open space in the in particularly at victoria manolo draves park is only multi use park in san francisco now this is the first project sponsor that is seeing out of their current popo requirement and so we spent a lot of time with the planning department and figuring out what is the probing appropriate proximate and changing the popos in the south of market they become usable and happy to see the planning department has recommended that all popos on the ground floor

and insuring half-hour use unlike the project sponsors to build popos in upper market floor is difficult for the public to find the proposition before us today is over years of negotiated fees looking nearby area plans abby seeing what that costs to improve maul open space acquisition in jangle 2015 the planning department made a preliminary recommendation that identified the acquiring of open space and park improvement costs their recommendation resulted in a fee of $2.3 million vbs of time we dwoefrd that actually, the requirements for congressional was slightly larger than we had originally that the planning department had in popo we're not acquiring the

open space the city can't legally ask for acquisition dollars and capped the fee at 200 and 50 thousand for improvement costs and added 15 percent to that amount and then we had the required open space of 18 hundred square feet resulting in a fee of $2.5 million $200,000 more than recommend boo the planning department two years ago this was before the land use and transportation committee in the month of december and we had learned that the intercongressional left a rental proposal for this privately owned public space on the website i want to recognize and thank you to the hotel to make sure that before we approve this in-lieu fee we worked on making

sure that they paroling accounted and remitted for this as a private function space they were transparent with us they had inappropriate use the space for 6 hundred days between 2016 having an penalty to the of hundred and thirty days of overflow is a penalty of - ultimately without actually any indication from us the project sponsor that they complied with the fire code that allows the fourth floor of popo to be a total of one and 80 days per year we worked in the weekend to in of the hotel can use this space as a private dysfunction and expanded the one thousand

plus days and this generates a roughly $300,000 the intercongressional hotel agreed to make a $300,000 gift to the city for the district 68 located park the san francisco alliance will be the sponsor and the funded sdrblthd by the parks alliance were working closely with the supergreen congressional hotel to make sure those funds are appropriately used the community says one of the needs of the interparks is expanding and making the park usable in the evening with the winter when it gets dark around 4 or 5 o'clock that requires the light it is inadequately lighted it opened to a later hours members of the community can't

see very well in the evening those fees will be utilized for lighting at park and hope to work with rec and park to implement that as quickly as possible to make sure our baseball and are curiosities can be utilized in the evening and a well utilized park for dogs and while we're not building another open space in the district we are expanding the hours as a multi use park i want to recognize the supergreen congressional hotel for working with our office over the last years to find a proper solution that has the support of the community members and the office of economic workforce development ♪ proposal and recognize the p pa with worked us with us to come up with a fee that is adequate for relinquishing the requirement for a popo

international hotel scott sanchez for the support for the process over the project and the vetting of the proposal and from the enforcement unit for walk through on the office of the enforcement office and to the city attorney for helping to draft this legislation i also see members of the friends victoria manolo draves park who are here today with (calling names) as well as jane thank you for working with us for a solution in support of neighborhoods and so i was hoping to bring up one of the project sponsor of oewd to go through the history how we calculated the industry payments >> good afternoon, supervisors

aaron from the office of economic workforce development i i guess i was asked to the take a look at the proposals working with the planning department represents and the original recommendation he was started with a 5 hundred per square feet fee applied to 4 thousand plus of open space and so when i started looking at it i realized the original are ordinance called for 8 thousand 6 hundred square feet of open space my initial recommendations to immediately file the 8 thousand 6 hundred and in speaking to planning department staff as well as rec and park staff and the department of real

estate it became clear that while a search to find open space in d-6 we can apply this fee to there didn't seem to be anything available, however, the planning department staff provided some nearby hard and soft costs fees or hard costs and soft costs they had if nearby plaza and open space projects including the emotional and the mint and the alleyway proposed costs that ranged from 61 square feet to 4 hundred plus a square foot and using the citywide development impact fee a negotiated fee not a impact fee there was no nexus study for the fee of this site so using

the beacon and looking at the eastern neighborhoods in today's dollars is one and $1 per square feet and using the basic factors of a range from 6 is to $430 in the impact fees and open space from one dollar up to $1,600 a square foot and kind of land in the middle so we can apply a fee that all sides can agree on. >> thank you so much. >> you said the original plans for 8 hundred hundred but built 46 hundred. >> did requirement was 8 hundred and 6 thousand square feet my understanding is during the approval of the hotel the planning commission recommended is another 4000 square feet my understanding that 4000 square

feet was a one time fee that was paid to the contribution to the mid plaza so 4000 to cover the costs of 4000 also just to clarify the planning department report identified when the identified the potential represents of the fee of $2.3 million had said that the supergreen come requirement of popo was 4000 plus and they were mistaken what was the original code requirement of open space was 8 thousand 6 hundred square feet at the time the planning commission recommended this was not great open space for members of the public they recommended that the supergreen congressional i guess pay an additional square feet in open space fees.

>> that's my understanding another 4000 square feet probable 8 thousand 6 hundred and they basically bought out a part at the beginning. >> bout out a park they pay a one time fee towards the plazas at the time and in my understanding was that was for the park space in the mountains of the 4000 square feet. >> thank you i don't see any other questions from the members of the committee we do have scott sanchez our zoning administrator from the planning department if there are any further questions if not open up for public comment. >> four speakers none 2

minutes (calling names) line up on the far wall. >> is this so hi supervisors thank you commenting my name is jane i'm the district 6 representative to prozac and i live a few blocks from the emergenintercontinenta want to thank the group that works tirelessly and staffing will go a long ways to improve the park and large improved rec center will be a help the popos do nothing with the fancy hotels are doing nothing to move the

life the mid market has said we have the least amount of open space per person as of 2014 district 6 two tenths of an open space versus 26 percent person in c-2 we're getting denser by the week it is faulty to allow the developers to create the open space for the neighborhood it is a they'll build what they want with the dark corners heightened inside of trump towers these are not visible from the street and doomed to be a homeless encampment encampment of anti social behavior this was the highest acquisition and the potential acquisition will be coming before you soon we need

more than one park we need as much as we can get now not in 10 years 10 thousand new units that were opened in a timely way - >> thanks thank you jane. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is heather phelps a south of market arrangement for 10 years work at united playaz and part of victoria manolo draves park it would be really easy to just close this and say the community negotiated a deal in 52007, 8 and see this the deal you said you'll do the popos and that's it i want to applaud jane's

office for drooifld and saying does that space serve the community i think that everyone can agree that didn't serve the community that and so instead of standing by saying this is on the promise that folks shouldn't see out of open space and thoughtfully considering how to best serve the communities and open space and residents this is a great example where community has driven a solution that makes sense with the dmv is a huge safety issue it brings the usable hours of the park it increases it by a huge percentage families are using the park in the afternoon and opens the space for adults in the neighborhood to use it for sports leagues and social events and dogs it really a multiple use park this will be enhance by

the kind of improvements my using to approve this not in fear it will set a precedence for other developers but how to best serve the community thank you

there. >> my name is jackie and i'm working with betsey carmichael i started working with them and one of the assignment to find a spot to it had to be at least four blocks and walked around the soma and couldn't find a park for students and patents to meet that was intreps i go in the excelsior we're blessed with the parks not one place that

felt inviting to walk to school we're trying to get the kids to walking and biking to school and not having a meeting spot is difficult in the excelsior it is one of the biggest challenges the fact we don't have a park nearby the park is one block away not constituting a gathering space thank you for finding the solution to this space that didn't workout and bringing up light to the park that would be great but keep in mind you need more open spaces in the area and more parks that's all i have to say. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hi, i'm tim a member of the b n d and the rec center and

worked with the rec and park reply and people don't realize that south of market has one of the biggest parks in the city but for the hall of justice they tore down the park and the city promised to put up a park but in 1990 when the jean center came up and so that area is also had few open space it was mentioned south park and some - it is amazing if you think about it ever since i've been there because of organizations and they deal with this how allow a gang issue in the south of market i worked there for 40 years it is because the kids were playing this park is across the alley from the school and

makes it an easy access for the kids after conditional but putting up lights and enhancing the park it will add tenfold to what it was and you know it will maybe bring back - it is amazing how the years go by people forgot and transition happens one of the biggest parts of the city was the park thank you very much. >> thank you is there anyone from the public that wishes to speak on item one. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor peskin thank you chair farrell separate and apart what was accounted i know that supervisor kim has been working on it for a long time and i was involved in the original entitlement of this project and here for the december hearing where it seems like the violation was still

happening it really raise a large populate question maybe i can ask plans relative to the elizabethcy of the planning department enforcement action around the popos in general, you have any ongoing of the monitoring how many popos not use for their original purposes and the enforcement actions do you and the department undertake and why did this one take so long. >> thank you, supervisor we take it seriously over the past foe years the legislation to approve improve the signage for the popos when that was proposed the staff reviewed it for all the code compliant and found

some not in complete compliance with the code since that time a couple of years our staff try to make periodic investigation for the popos we have active closing statement for one popo generally, the enforcement it bans the complaint but try to do the proper enforcement and have been doing that with the popos in t in the continental hotel a couple of items not just the popo but the enforcement related to the popo the knowledge of the violation so for the signage that had been corrected what was new information about their use the use of property for something other than the public activating that was more of a

few information we never received complained to the office about that use of property for non-public uses but certainly under the code and outlined to the project sponsor given this type of outside open space it didn't need to be made public assessable 24/7 for the guidance of popos terraces maybe public assessable continue 10 and 5:00 p.m. and beyond that for private events. >> and relative to other enforcement actions you guys assessed and/or correction for penalties. >> one that i just issued a notice of violation for so if they don't respond under compliance penalties for the assessable property. >> and relative to the pro-active enforcement you have sufficient staff to go and randomly or comprehensively go

and check them. >> i'm happy to report excellent support from the supervisors to increase the enforcement staffing back at the time the complaint came in we have before a full-time staff now more than doubled it with the will enforcement staff on focused issues and signages and short-term rentals so i think we're well-staffed now we are going to be more pro-active in looking how to improve the other tools and we'll be working with the city attorney's office to try to improve our be enforcement tools to make them more efficient and effective looking to initiative legislation to make the tools more robust. >> between the december resolutions and this committee that the violations were ongoing and in today's hearing my

subsequent actions taken by planning relative to enforcement in this case. >> no issues of notice of violation were issued for the property but had discussions with the project sponsor about prop c and in compliance with the passage of this legislation there will be a path to obviously to make it so they'll not have the popo requirement but legalize the structure and pay out the steering wheels for the process to evade violations on the property. >> i had the honor and privilege of being worked out appointed to the california coastal meeting and attend my first meeting they assess heavy administration penalty in their law and i have to say it remarkable when you assess some of those and entire communities of violators all of this relative to public access to you

know the coastal line if you don't say the penalties tools you need this board of supervisors to give them to you i'm more happy to participate in 3 legislation. >> thank you supervisor kim. >> thank you chair farrell and just to follow up on supervisor peskin's comments we learned some of the violations we did here an enter around the history over the last decade and going to have a hearing hope in april with the planning department with the enforcement capacity and history as well i think it is a to fold issue one make sure we are writing the legislation and the planning code in a way the city could a enforce our laws this is one issue i think that certainly recommending moving forward the popos are on the ground floor

will help in that enforcement arena and second a violation how to support the planning department in issuing these notice of violations and something that the penalties fees and so figuring out the resources we've been expanding the number of issues that the planning department has enforced in the city recently with the expansion of short-term rentals in particular that is important to have broader conversation on the enforcement finally i just wanted to ask the committee for i'll make a motion to move forward with a positive recommendation i want to thank the members of our community and the south of market so for working with us along with the planning department office of office of economic workforce development and also to the

congressional helt to bring forward in proposed negotiation that supports victoria manolo draves park and $300,000 for the acquisition and programming throughout the next foe years committee members he ask for your support and happy we're bringing over two to three years of discussion to a close hopefully today at the board of supervisors. >> thank you, supervisor kim and i'll say i'm happy to support in item today, i think that anytime you have you know those popos i agree with supervisor kim's comment about the planning department staff is going forward more for the public it better he wonder whether the popos were not i'd like highway they were created and the community comes together my frustration that item is

lined not outside of city a staff but my office has been working on it setting the 2017 budget and legislative analyst services audit plan - police department. >> and it came forward i don't know what department but want to go forward i would certainly expect something better and different if we calendar this we need all the information well in advance with that said, this is a good thing for the community and want the hotels the intercongressional to operate freely and use those spaces so happy to support this so supervisor kim is that a admonition supervisor kim to magnified with recommendations without objection all right. mr. clerk item 2 item 2 ceqa findings - sewer system improvement program, southeast water pollution plant new headworks facility. chapter three 1 including the

adoption of mitigation and reporting programs to raise the funding for the ceqa findings - sewer system improvement program, southeast water pollution plant new headworks facility. >> okay thank you very much i know the puc is here to speak on this item so let's get going. >> i believe we have a fingertip presentation as well. >> yeah. and john will be preparing good afternoon chair farrell i'm karen the wastewater entries director at the san francisco public works and before i move into the details i want to give you a little bit of background about the improvement programs and the ahead works facility the map in front is to orient you have the wastewater and be stormwater treatment use within the 49 square miles of the city we operate during dry and wet wleefrn and up and down showing in orange we have two drainage

spaces and john, i want to highlight the treatment plant to the west the young i did point oceanside up to the northeast the wet weather the north plant and lastly the facilities where the work will be occurring southeast the bayview hunters point the southeast control plant that was planned r planned in the 1940s and exclusions in the 1950's that's where the budget will be occurring some of the challenges are odor and noise, visible, maintaining water quality as shown the infrastructure schematic safety the wastewater has not been upgraded as the departments in the city and rational liability and now having a sea level rise so our solution for the 0

improvement program has 3 components gray meaning building more pump stations and operational green counting stormwater to slow down the movement from the system because it does get overwhelmed and the maintenance for the clean ocean as part of program established a level of service enforced by the commission and guide the project acceleration i want to point you to the first one all of these are obviously important but the ones that focus on southeast plant i think like the compliances with the regulatory permit with the regulatory and the commission of the crome safety to operate in a wide range of southeast plant not been you got we're at risk of aging system failing and making us not compliant that is the styling of the urgency we're

under and the ssip is $6.9 billion shows the definition of treatment and the collection system we've within authorized for phase one that is the first column 2. $9 billion to billion dollars of the fund are going to be have found in the southeast plant for facilities if you look at the highlighted like that in yellow that is the new ahead works facility that total is $359 million for this project of the project of the $359 million 200 and $56 million for the construction the construction funds are only controllers appropriation reserve that is to the commission approval you received in february 28th and your consideration adoption of the ceqa vpthdz i'm presenting to you today, i want to advise you that the puc is

pursuing low interest fund for the costs so this is happening in parallel the next the aerial of the southeast plant every skweech is covered an impacted site it is in bayview hunters point it treats 80 percent of city's wastewater 24/7 it is a constrained sites by residents and businesses and has caltrans in the back their aging and while we do the construction we'll be operating the treatment plant not a back up plant but i'd like challenges that we have this is the plant for the future these are some of the new facilities that will be built the blue is the facilities that we're back to talk about that another day the green where the ahead works is where everything enters the plant from the north

and setting the ahead works it moving large obstacles like tires and bricks and two by for us on the system and has to remove sand and fine grit so it takes up valuable capability an esteeming odor reduce portion so much air is a changing place not got the more than control ulthd for the schematic the standards were different than today so those are located at overview advanced this is a shot of what the new facility will look like a lot of the focus on the grit removal for the fine screening to get that out of the system before that enters the rest find plant and enhancing the control for the status quo control system

this is a cut a 3-d cut of new head works a challenging facility it has to be able to operate at dry weather and maximize in wet weather the new 200 and $50 million from left to right the facilities screenings and brick handling a a distribution structure and has a control room and electrical facility if we look at the schedule we have received the final mitigated negative declaration from the planning department we have authority from the commission to move forward february 2nd-year budget with the committees recommendation we'll begin construction in august a 5 year construction period now as i mentioned the project has received a negative declaration and determined the project area has a sensitivity

for agriculture site if on previous geoagricultural points now at the bottom that was conformed using tier engine for operating the enlistment and diesel not to exceed the pollutant for the oxygen dioxide and lastly in the future when your driving down evans they're working with the agricultural and the city intervene on the agricultural concept that slide a concept that is approved in phase one and will be turning to the review for approval shortly the gray white patching is an area we are having a public art place for the selection and that art is underway so at this time i wanted to ask

for the adoption for the negative declaration the ceqa and the monitoring and reporting program and direction for the controller to release and like to ask the committee supervisors to carry forward a motion to correct a clerical error the wrong index code on this page we would like to get that fixed and i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> about the project or the ssip. >> thank you very much supervisor peskin. >> so sorry for my ignorance generally ceqa documents are adopted by the department of decide planning why are we making the findings for the adopted diagnosis. >> this has the requirement in the funding of the legislation payroll this is an unusual thing

pointed out by the manager as well you'll be seeing this and returning at other private documents we want to make sure all the dot all the i's and cross the t's on this it was wart of the funding. >> and relative to the correction on line 12 for the project number is that what you're referring to. >> yes. recycle. >> line 14, page one. >> no numbers on line 13 but. >> well 12. >> what's the correct number. >> c w w ssip example s e i two. >> it says - and that's incorrect. >> you want it to be. >> c w w ssip s e zero two. >> i get it. >> and relative to community

outreach any controversy. >> this one we received no comment on the viral process we had great support on this project i think that the project that is attracting perhaps more public interest the project just this past weekend a working group an open house out at a boyer opera houses attended by 40 residents to learn about the projects we have there has not been the level of controversy or questions been support or people realizing that is a project for the wastewater treatment a understood and relative to outreach what kind of outreach do you do relative to noticing. >> many, many public meetings and workshops. >> we had been 30 or 35 meeting in the neighborhood

about this project it is with do you want to come up. >> i guess what i'm trying to get at karen month folks think of ceqa documents as going to planning so people in various communities that follow those are following calendar and not following the hard calendar 99 percent go the answer you noticed everybody in the same way that planning notice people for a fundamental document that's what i'm getting at. >> we be continuing do the working class forward at this .2000 on the southeast plant er bike tours we are trying to get it so everybody is aware of what

is happening at the wastewater plant. >> thank you okay seeing no further questions open up for public comment. >> thank you i have one card i know that is david pilpal. >> you are like the soccer star and anyone else. >> mr. pilpal. >> i want to speak in support i served 3 and a half on the advisory committee and 10 years on the wastewater i'm familiar with this component project that was an important project that took place for the aging infrastructure babe bar screens and other attempts further up the line to remove odor and contaminates this is the first opportunity to remove grit and

other materials that interfere with the treatment process so i believe this will improve the efficiency of the process and reduces the oertdz and replace the infrastructure blah, blah that was properly followed and staff karen and others have done great work i support it i believe you have an amendment to the bearing the same title and it corrects the project title under the old financial system and makes minor changes for about the admin code so i commend that and urge your support have a nice day. >> thank you mr. pilpal. >> supervisor peskin. >> i want to thank puc staff and the deputy city attorney mr. pilpal we do have an amendment

of the whole before us i'll clear on the language on line 12. >> that comes to us from city staff i'll adopt it but not from the public just the chance in the index code i don't know what version that is. >> this is kind of weird kind of annoying i'll check to see if this is on the website at the top that says amended in committee 3, 2017 and today is monday, march 20, 2017, so we've not taken an amendment i don't want to sound like a process queen but on the website how you guys took action before we take action how do you take an action on our on behalf mr. pilpal is

correct it says amended in committee monday, march 20, 2017, how do you guys put something on the website before the legislative body has taken action. >> we were working on the draft and it was disdisclosed we're moving at this time. >> just to be clear on page one. >> who knows it is amended as a whole no red line and the road to hell is paved with weird stuff like this. >> so you couldn't ask them to the city attorney's office or the staff. >> i'll propose to do this what karen said i will make a motion at line 12 on page one cu w 20 and replace that with c w w ssip

c zero two and make that amendment. >> just to be clear on line 12 page one we'll adopt about motion i by supervisor peskin and seconded by supervisor kim as amended. >> thank you and then the other line item to move and seconded by supervisor kim and without objection thank you. i appreciate it everyone. >> deputy city attorney pacific islander pal. >> mr. clerk, call item 3. >> transportation demand management program. and methodology and justification documents. >> okay. thank you very much so we're on item 3 we'll go back really quick we have to make a

set of amendments to supervisor kim can i have a motion to rescind the vote. >> on item one. >> motion by supervisor kim and seconded by supervisor peskin if i can talk without objection and supervisor kim. >> my apologies for missing this we thought we contributed this in the subsequent legislation that came in a little bit later i mends in a foul fellow up that the property owner project sponsor had been illegally using the private space over the last 3 months worked on a gift to address and remedy the violations that they had been making i had stated that this gift was returned up to $300,000 to the san francisco

parks alliance to be used for activation and at the victoria manolo draves park i had submitted those amendments now to the clerk and members of the land use and transportation committee to provide an additional amendment we have acceptance of additional fund for the victoria manolo draves park or other existing underutilized parks in district 6 at the $300,000 and so that language is now before the land use and transportation committee and looking for the city attorney to see if this is adequate and efficient. >> john gibner, deputy city attorney. yes. the amendment reflected the one hundred thousand dollars for popos maintenance as well and the details are in the copy for the department. >> thank you mr. gibner and so i'd like to make a motion to amend item number one, to

rehabilitate the summary that i have just articulated. >> supervisor kim through the chair not to be a process queen to items in a row if you can hand me a copy of that that would be great before i second. >> we'll pause for supervisor peskin. >> i want to appreciate the members of the board are looking at this before they amend it. >> just to be clear supervisors i got these before committees as we raise the committee about who to adopt it. >> my apologies i was not aware of that the amendment were not distributed to the community members we'll remedy this next time. >> not a problem

here's - in page 3 sub 3 there is two changes one is the board authors a payment in the fee of 2 housing unit $6 million instead of $2.5 million and at the end of the sentence one thousand dollars for the maintenance cost that typically a copy is popos this is the responsibility of the private owner this is an explanation for the 2.5 to 2.6 and then the three hundred thousand is the gift acceptance so for pages four or five. >> i didn't state that when the item was up we worked with the rec and park in coming up with the one hundred thousand to

be added to the in-lieu fee payment and rec and park stated that $2,600 is the cost for the maintenance of once we installed it we estimated that 31 years is the period of time that popo will be in use poor so the total maintenance cost for 35 years is 2 - is 91 thousand we rounded that up to one thousand for the in-lieu fee payment so the 2.5 authorizes is the capital plan and the additional $1,000 is maintaining the light as our pd has summarized. >> and there are to copies so just so you have a copy of the amendments i have read them and can second the amendments. >> we have a motion to approve number one, by supervisor kim

and seconded by supervisor peskin without objection and as amended supervisor kim and seconded by supervisor peskin and we without objection that passes. thank you we're back to item 3 colleagues this item was sponsored by supervisor yee, supervisor fewer and supervisor cohen i see supervisor fewer and supervisor cohen in committee welcome to the land use and transportation committee and i'm going to turn it over to supervisor yee we'll turn it over to you first. >> okay. thanks chair farrell and other committee members and i want to thank supervisor fewer and supervisor cohen for co-sponsor this i called this hearing today to get a deeper understanding of behind the methodologies of the planning of the city transportation demand management program which the board of supervisors approved earlier this year i think we can finally agree that the city should doing everything

we can to encourage the vehicles miles traveled traveled in cars the at least not the best the best and the least that is the ultimate of transportation demand management program. i understand the program is ever eventually to choose from the needs transportation demand management goal is a living document that is why i wanted to bring the planning team to this committee to talk through some of the thinking that allows us the ability to engagement in the process as it develops in my own district we are using transportation demand management to discuss the transportation and parking the potential balboa park housing site which is used by the city college as a parking lot want to when the planning department brought this proposal to me i thought the study will

stud anothers existing impacts and help to suggest short term solutions to the traffic as it exists today of course, i was assured it was part of transportation demand management study not only the aspect will go future planning and deferring people if driving in the first place so the bathroom, came before i was in the agreement i had many questions about the point system and how the formula works it is is on ongoing process for the community and myself i know that the team at planning and sfmta has studied the data steven i want to provide on overall the that the commission does not tolerate outbursts of any kind and talk about the methodologies

and want to thank the staff for allowing us the opportunity to deplete into this and ask for questions before i bring up the staff i think supervisor fewer want opening remarks. >> thank you supervisor yee i'm new to the board i've not been here for previously discussions but i had a question around the options and the thinking behind that i'm in support of transportation demand management program i think that it is really forward thinking to do that and i have concerns about the overall city goals and whether or not we're looking at other measures besides the vehicles miles traveled and options thinking they can

compliment other city goals we have collectively decided on as a board and city so that's why i'm here today and i hope to learn a lot but again, i'm concerned about the options and able to perhaps double down on the citywide goals in muni versus with the levers to lose move this initiative we're reducing the vehicles miles traveled thanks. >> okay so why not get started i have here wade. >> so i'm carli if sfmta i'll kickoff and wade will from planning will go through the second part. >> it's all yours carla

thank you for having us. we're delighted to be here with supervisor peskin with the transportation demand management program. with you as you may know we care deeply about and proud of as those of you, we can talk about it for quite a while we appreciate the invitation to talk that it more with you as you mentioned the transportation demand management program. was adopted by the board of supervisors about a moa month and a half go went into affect the transportation demand management ordnance is the third component of the transportation sustainability program and oh, i'm sorry please it went up thank you all right. we're be looking at the lines so the transportation demand management or the shift component establishes reminders

for plan use projects to integrate onsite amenities or services into their projects to support site users in making the trips they need to make by sustainable modes modes other than cycling and it links the other to consultant of transportation sustainability program by encouraging and 7-eleven using transit and walking and biking with the will component invests in and reducing the vehicles miles traveled this is the focus of the lined components and murray measuring a more robust environmental review to the board of supervisors adopted the policy framework in approving the transportation demand management ordinance the planning commission adopted the regulations and various specific detailed of how the program will

be implemented in their action to approve the program the regulations are brought dough in a document called the tdm we've been asked to share the details of today an overall of the presentation overall we're here to explain the technical aspects of the tdm and the purpose of tdm program and how we define the measure for the purposes of this program to go over the tdm venue including generally in the memo and specifically how points of allocated for measures and let the progress to update the tdm process over time and including two examples of projects how the tdm program applies to those projects and how they will work in light of the details we're walk you through

so first, the purpose of program the purpose of the whole transportation sustainability program to keep the city mo' magic as it grows the tdm reduces the vehicles miles traveled that is a core focus of this program so when we talk about reducing the vehicles miles traveled in a development project we're talking about reducing vehicles miles traveled for that project compared to what would otherwise happy for that development project in that location the vehicles miles traveled or v m t measures the amount and distance that people would drive to - in using and assessing a site and vehicles miles traveled is a function of diversity of land uses and options for non-driving and driving transportation area

those are elements of vehicles miles traveled but an individual project can't affect the things that a project can effect are the kinds of amenities offered and how much other things we care about the vehicles miles traveled in san francisco is you know from the transportation perspective for the reducing the vehicles miles traveled is critical to reducing the congestion and demand on the roadways that is a limited reservoirs in san francisco and not expanding vehicles miles traveled reduction also has a benefit of environmental benefit of reducing noise and energy consumption and air pollution for local pollutants and green house gas emissions and vehicles miles traveled reduction also is closely aligned with the vision zero reducing the motorist trips and distances is critical to reducing the "x" pours to

vehicle crashes and injuries and to get into that a little bit more that might not be an intuitive concept to but we'll show you a couple of studies that are referred reveal a fundamental relationship between vehicles miles traveled and safety multiple traffic and safety studies show a correlation between higher b m t and crashes but of causality between total miles traveled and crashes so more b m t more crashes and more serious and fatalities in san francisco we're serious about in fact, the vision zero representatives came and testified in front of the board of supervisors saying that the

tdm is an important tool in the tool in the tool box so to remind you the way the program works every project has to select from a memo of options in order to accrue enough points to achieve it's required points the target so we identifying would measures should be in this memo of options first, we had to define whether or not the tdm measure for this purpose of this program clearly the project programming is reducing the tdm so the measures have to be measures that effectively reduces the vehicles miles traveled they have to effect the trips of sited users retained and workers that are visitors to cite and under the control of

property owner because this is something we're asking the developer and the future property owners to be responsible for so the rules we identified the measures to evaluate for inclusion in the memo was during a litter review of what tdm measures have out there that are demonstrated to be effective looking at the planning code for what we're already requiring and how to build off the existing requirements and looked at it other injured across the country in best practices in terms of requirements and transportation demand management measures implemented voluntarily that could be - are

great tdm measures that will be challenging to assure and monitor for compliance as you may recall in insuring the projects are delivering the measures that they've committed

to a core component we want to make sure that every measure in the memo that was something we can describe how you can be compliant and we the city will make sure your complying i'm going to turn it over to wade from the planning department to get into the details of the memo and how the points are allocated we'll both be available for questions. >> thank you carli and good afternoon, supervisors i'm wade senior planning planning department great to be back here again to talk about the tdm hopefully on acronym we all know and i'm going to pick up where carli left off in that once we choose the measures that met the tdm measure put them into a category as shown here those 8

categories car share and delivery and family-friendly, high-occupancy vehicle and information to communication, land use and parking management those 8 categories contain 26 tdm measures some of the measures have additional options what different requirements and this resulted in 6 of options all of the options have been allocated points reflective based on how ritualistic in reducing the vehicles miles traveled this we used a variety of different sources to assign the points for we look at other literature some works was a comprehensive report done by the california air pollution transfers how effect for reducing the bmt and the ongoing research by the california air

resources board as part of nfl 375 land use and transportation planning requirements and an example of where we look to other jurisdictions and the research they did in washington, d.c. there was some research around how effective bike share in if environment and tried to apply that research to san francisco and looked at it other academics research as well that was on top of what we spent two summers in san francisco particularly looking at the effect parking space supply had at the vehicles miles traveled at individual development sites based on the results of that research that echoed research that we have read statewide and nation wide that more people are driving we looked at two other

jurisdictions to see they how they weighed the factors and by looking at the expert opinion how effect they were some manufactured like the messengers that carli mentioned around family-friendly not really literature whether or not they reduced the vehicles miles traveled but banks our professional opinion we felt they can needling we cast the point value for any measure that didn't have the dabbed evidence so the nursuntil we collect fora to see if they're effective. >> that resulted in the memo of options with a point allocation that you see here i'm

not going to go over the measures but highlight a few of them based on conversations we've had the first i'll mention is improved walking conditions to options here both are allocated one point and then we acknowledge that walking conditions and connectivity have important, however, an spentsz that an individual developer improves the walking around the site are limited there are circumstances but get into situations with a development agreement where a development can influence those circumstances are rare and this is because most walking conditions improvements were requiring area for quarter wide improvements to really reduce the wlt effectively with that

said we district staff to look at those measures a little bit more the walking measures that is and we tint on doing that along with the measures that are on the memo one of the other measures is the shuttle bus measure we heard a number of comments on the process i want to highlight this measure it bans literature proven to be quite effective thus i point value quite effective at reducing the vehicles miles traveled but we don't anticipate this measure will be selected except for rare and unique circumstances and this is because this measure is very costly the frequency requirement of running the shuttle as defined in the measure are quite effect frequent is a large operational

cost and unique in that it requires really city staff vincent van gogh and approval of this measure we want to make sure from the developer has suggested this measure that there are no hazards associated with the location zone that measure is not duplicating a public transit service that is near the site there would be some vetting associated with this measure and then i want to mention on this memo there are some items that are geography based a unbundled parking and parking supply and health food and underserved areas by chair manipulating based on the geography of the site and characteristics you'll get points for those measures pr and we intend on updating in

memo over time as we discussed previously and supervisor yee mentioned that the tdm seem like is dynamic we want to be up to date in that dynamic fold we can update those measures this can occur as carli mentioned the board of supervisors adopted the policy and then the planning commission adopted the regulation there are certain amendments that what require the planning commission approval those are outlined here staff will be conducting research to see how effective the tdm measures are over time whether new ideas that warrant conclusion in the memo or clarify measures to make sure they're more effective all of these amendments will be data driven in regards to

vehicles miles traveled production we intend on reporting those to the planning commission and as request do in the board of supervisors after one year and every 4 years we also will be reporting on things like the frequency measures that are selected they're effectiveness and inside of projects that are subject to this so that concluded the technical details i wanted to run through two project examples to illustrate those a little bit further both examples i want to stress are hypothetical but they may reasonably reflect the projects in two different geography locations the example demonstrate the geographic pointed values in some of the measures i've referred so the first project will be located at

ocean avenue with 60 units 40 percent booemz and onsite affordable unit and one space per parking space per unit and based on those number of parking spaces the target we didn't go into some the presentation but there target is 17 points that is the number of points that project has to achieve to comply with the tdm program i'll show 3 slides for this example all the slides have images from a web-based tool it you all member of the public developers can use i have a link to the tool on the last slide so for this project the project will get 3 points between the geography based measures on unbundled parking and parking

supply and unbundled parking as well as another measure bike parking are planning code requirements so this is something that arbitrary mentioned those planning code requirements are effective at reducing the vehicles miles traveled we're giving credit for that and select on this slide car share that is above and beyond what the planning code requires so the property owner here will be required to provide more car share spaces and also car share membership for each unit combined on the slide the project is halfway has 8 of the 17 points to get the rest of the points sort of scrolling on the web-based tool need 9 more points i've selected

family-friendly measures and between the combination of those car share and the percentage of two bedrooms on the site the project will get two more points what we're demon a tdm package other measures are are signage and the project will get points for the amount of level of fundamental to combined with this project have a number of measures that will become their tdm. >> and quickly i'll go through another example it is similar in sort of character but smaller in size and in a different location here at geary and 6th street this t has 40 percent unit onsite affordable housing and 40 parking spaces so again the project is one parking space per one unit and given in project has 20 fewer parking spaces from

the previous a target of fewer points shown on the slide is 50 points so and in example the project will get additional points for the geographic location for unbundled parking and zero points for parking supply and selected some additional bike parking for the project and car share parking again on this slide it gets 7 points and then on the last slide to get the additional 8 points i've selected slightly different the amenities and again family-friendly amenities and a measure that didn't require space in the building and this is contributions incentive? in this events a subsidy to each

unit in the building for a muni pass a transit pass and again the project will get points for onsite affordability and combined the project meets the territory of 18 points so hopefully, this priority a better explanation of the details of the tdm project we're happy to discuss further and that concludes my presentation. thank you thank you wade. >> any questions here for - any public comment seeing none, public comment is closed. chair farrell public comment is closed. >> just to be clear anyone want to comment on item 3 seeing none, public comment is closed. and i have some. >> can we ask about the shuttle piece that you gave an example for for

the ocean avenue - well, yeah you're probably bordered that particular site but the shuttle piece for a shuttle that is coming out of the /* balboa and, of course, the motivation for students to also students get out of their cars if one does a shutter there how does that work what kind of place would you assign to that and one, is that the shuttle is not necessary because of the public transportation or whatever can you respond to that before - >> so i heard several

questions let me make sure one the question is the balboa came forward and said we want to achieve your points through a shuttle how will we evaluate you may or may not that's would be one of the questions and another question how to design that shuttle service you asked how does that work i'm not sure the other part. >> how does the point system work. >> oh, okay so assuming we said, yes how will the point system work the first one to answer whether we how we'll evaluate it is you know mta did is working on guiding principles for private transportation of all types of and those principles are like reducing congestion and bmt and

accessibility and equity and transparent of - labor standards and monitoring and impacts on sfmta operations and revenues so we will evaluate the shuttle service, however, it was described by the project sponsor they will likely give the routinely and the power and the frequency we'll evaluate it whatever their proposal based on the principles and criteria that we're we will set up now say we said sure there is a gap in transit accessibility or assess there all the your operations are great you have perfect places for loading and unloading and committed to safety practices for the operators e in terms of their points there is basically two

and the points are you get more points for the higher frequency so 7 points for providing 15 head ways during peak hours and less and 13 for 7 and a half minutes head ways during peak or less during peak hours it is really the frequency of service and if you think about the points reflecting how much of an impact on vehicles miles traveled it will have clearly a shuttle is something twice as frequently it is more likely to be a dependable options than less coming less frequently we see that with the transit that's how the points are elevated and assigned if we say check all the boxes just to be clear for the

record i'm not it does for this site but that conveyer. >> just curious that was a real site and not the recommendations for shuttles. >> that's a topic a different topic. >> i know, i know. >> i wanted to trap you guys in having shuttles. >> thank you. >> (laughter). you know can - so you're assigned the points and so forth and hoping that the developers will then follow through with their commitments and i guess the question is given how difficult it is to - and in development whether that is for we have all the regulations and then - but we know that the dbi

department of building inspection and so forth sometimes they don't necessarily go back and inspect things and wait for someone to complain how will you enforce those elements >> i'll ask wade i'll say this is something that sets this apart from neither here nor there anything else in the planning code correct and so. >> an earlier item today that was talking about complaint and most of planning code is complaint basis we've built into a pro-active monitoring and recording to with the various fees associated with the tdm program a developer will have to fee a portion of those fees staff assigned to do staff

audits 0 review annual i should say going on monitoring and reporting reports from the developer so right before and to illustrate before it development a occupied prior to the certificate of occupancy planning department staff will parlor that physical measures are in place how many car share shares will you provide and how many are there as well as that there ready to implement any programmatic so the transit measures i've mentioned previously the site is opted out and 18 months that is ongoing monitoring reports will be required by the developer or the property owner so they'll have to show documents that those car share spaces are there and providing those subsidies and pay on

ongoing fee to planning dedicated planning department staff just for this effort. >> i have a question for in regards to family-friendly elements and how would the impacts be measured differently in the development has hero children your specifically if i understand how have assigned points to take an average or whatever of the conditions and if the development is family-friendly would the correct number of units and childcare and everything else a family will really look for would the points be different. >> yeah. that's a good question if i can rephrase your question

from the project said they'll have 100 percent two bedrooms or three bedrooms will they get more points for the family-friendly measures that is something we hope to study more in the future those measures were actually things i've mentioned in the presentation we don't have a lot of literature to support how effective they are but we think they work and by given the lack of material we cap it at 2 points at this time we hope there is more literature out there someplace and collect our own data i know that the desire for family-friendly housing is a real one and i think those measures support that but a lot of the other measures are in are not deemed family-friendly are supported because it is a different category didn't mean

it didn't support family-friendly like i'm sorry, go ahead. >> there is the bonus points if you do the both family-friendly measures and i think that is category option c for the car share and a certain proposition is that 3 or 2. >> 40 percent two bedrooms or greater two bedroom unit onsite there say you do all those things a mega package bonus points. >> labeled in the two examples that i showed. >> thank you supervisor fewer do you - >> yes. thank you supervisor yee. >> so thanks for your presentation i'm narrowly it down my concern is that i get you're with mta and planning and

this is around transportation and vehicles miles traveled however, i think that i was thinking about how do we see this memo to further other city initiatives that are equally as important as reducing the amount of vehicles on the road so when i look at those options the option kickoff in the sister low and this is one of my sequesters also that we are planning in a silo we're not planning aligned with some of the other goals as affordable housing or goals of reduction of vehicles so i'm also looking at some of the transportation marketing services what do you mean and looking at when you say federal reserve i'll thinking of the implementation of transportation

i'm not seeing more large projects the option to fund a new transit stop and pay into muni to actually have services i don't see any of those options what i'm thinking we talked about the family-friendly for low income families don't have cars so i don't see an option of actually having a resale basis within the project for a grocery store for example, or a laundromat or those kinds of amenities for families they'll actually need a vehicle to or take a car or use a vehicle in order to do that so i'm - i guess my thing about this my main concern and maybe not so much an objection but a critical thing is that it seems

we can, e be using the levers to advance to the citywide measures not in acy low around the vehicles miles traveled how many vehicles miles traveled i think we need to look at this with an eye to reduce the amount of vehicles on the road that reducing the amount of private vehicles on the road or by corporations or run by corporations that are unregulated in the community such a uber and lyft i'm looking at levers looking at this as there could be other mothers that help us with not just this goal but through a new memorial system we're all working together that's my main complained i'm learning about it honest i i don't know a lot about it but we're thinking about it in a

low - we heard a presentation on the fascinate housing here which actually could be a way to push that forward also you know - the value over something like bike share membership or showers or lockers like the points system could reflect this is sort of a greater need we give the developers more points for doing it possibly a society it means more so that is my push back on it i know you've that worked a

long time and a lot of planning around this i know i'm coming in late to this so i just want to say i appreciate thank you for all your hard work my push back it a rereluctance to and then the planning around other city initiative that are also trying it was with little resources this is one of the reasons we used to promote some of the things citywide that it didn't just about vehicles miles traveled that is liveability and will remaining the exit and ruining the families and low wage workforce that serves us in san francisco when i look at those things i'm looking at it really is one lens of this measurement and you're just trying to

accomplish one thing but i'd like to rethink this actually, we might be able to accomplish many things that's my comments thanks so much >> thank you supervisor fewer you trigger another thing i forgot to ask i think there some assumptions here and i can't argue with it one way or another but speculate just something that been in my thoughts and other people's thought for quite a while a generation of people that are using or owning vehicles less than a generation before at the same time when we talked

to not generation of people many of them even though they unite not own a car depends on vehicles not necessary public transportation all the time meaning their constantly taking uber or something like that this is the taxis that's what is happening and i don't think we do enough research ♪ arena when what is 40 thousand cars are running around san francisco driving constantly trying to pick up somebody so and he kind of wondered it is like somebody said well, you don't need a parking space but 40 thousand vehicles running around operating all day long and at least one that drives like sometimes myself from my house to here i'm parked

and i'm not driving my vehicle around and around and around causing more pollution so this is a tough one i think we need to - these indicators whatever you call them seriously we have to look at that aspect because your assumption is that oh, they don't have a vehicle wow. we publics driving less and if someone is telling you in the survey oh, half the time i'm taking lyft to work - it sort of there is no your assumptions out the door basically what is better to have you know 80 vehicles driving around our home running for you if you ask them to drive them or

someone to drive and if we can reduce the vehicle usage ever people that live in san francisco and those that are coming from all over the place to pick up the slack for those not ownership a car that would be great i don't know if that is happening any responses to that >> supervisor yee. >> great observation and the prevalence of for hire transportation network companies e has increased obviously in the city over the last foe years we're doing the city is doing a number of efforts to understand the began as part of transportation for the california environmental quality act we're curbing undergoing data collection at sites to see

see prevalence of people using those types of services and you referred to asking people how much they're using them and there's i think that is also the real benefit of this program right now this program is built absolutely on the fact like you said more parking people more driving as well as the number of other things built into the program but we can update this program over time to rehabilitate the last research if we determine it that you know maybe parking supply didn't have the effect as two years ago as two years from now we can refine overseeing measures and the target based on the research and mta has nothing further to add. >> i want to say further it

will be hard to study those vehicles for hire when their gray or brown listing you. >> gray balling you. >> may i. >> i want to piggyback on it i will not in favor of my policy that promotes the use or even gives an option for use of private transportation to hire i think that we have not studied it we've not regulated it i think it is in constitution with the public transportation and if there was an article in the negotiation times about the reduction of use in the over speculation of the vehicles and so if you want to get serious about vision zero say you frustrating to me we need to

write in the policy about concession that will adversely to vision zero goal i mean, i am not a social scientists but i like 45 thousand or whatever uber or lyft's on the road for cars will be more accidents in cars or people driving cars yes when i looked at this i was hoping that your not thinking of actively giving points to partner with a private shuttle service like this this is simply not acceptable it is different if you have a shuttle service that is not-for-profit but thinking about offering 7 points for shuttle service that is privatized that actually works in xeemgsz with our own public transportation system then i

have to say i'm not against that we have to reassure we will have a public transportation system that is viable that is assessable, that is remarkably priced and effect for everyone in san francisco regardless of how rich you or how how many resources you have to hire someone privately i think we had a trouble taxi system but let's remember he's a and not expiation of labor when i read that that was one of the red flags about a shuttle service i thought man that is actually promoting the use of a private shuttle service i'm not in favor it is - it i look at what is happening in new york and the place again that is taken over

not just uber and lyft but other companies that is needs to be regulated very soon before i mean, i think we should have a hearing on the back of our workforce and the impact on transportation, what's the impact on vision zero and good life and our roads and is maintenance of roads and we haven't done that yet so i'm when i looked at this memo of options that is the one thing that freaked me out you i'm trying to piggyback on supervisor yee is saying this is needs to be studied and actually should be outstanding it very, very carefully we know that soon there will be automated vehicles lyft and uber are working towards feel we'll not put a -

slow down it to protect the public transportation system thank you. >> any other comments seeing none, are you public? >> we already had public school sorry i want to thank the staff for coming to this hearing and presenting and i'm pretty convinced you know staff is working on it considers about this issue and how it can improve the lives of san franciscans and i'm glad to hear that there's some sense of flexibility ♪ ♪ program and you have absolutely corrected it but a start i think that it will be good for us to have you come back in a year to

see what has happened so we can weigh in and point out other things to consider at this time, i'd like to go ahead and close this hearing >> okay supervisor yee made a motion shall we file the hearing. >> to the call of the chair. >> we'll ask for a hearing in the future. >> motion by supervisor kim and without objection thanks supervisor yee and supervisor fewer mr. clerk, is there any additional business to come before this body? >> that completes the agenda for today. >> thanks

other business: opportunity when commissioners, the director, and the public may bring up topics for discussion, providing that any action is delayed until proper notice can be grantcouncilmember chow is a

asked if i would be kind enough to chair this meeting to proceed with the many important items today we will call to order roll call please. >> councilmember pating. >> present. >> mayor lee. >> present. >> councilmember sanchez. >> present. >> councilmember chung. >> present. >> councilmember karshmer. >> present. >> the approve of the minutes of march 7th. 2017. (no audio). [audio cutting out] >> motion to approve. >> second. >> any discussions or questions if not. call for the motion. all in favor, please say, "aye." >> (multiple voices): aye. >> any opposed? approved. next item. >> directors report. >> good afternoon commissioners we have great information and i wanted him to take questions and comments from you. >> good afternoon. i wanted to lel you now on march 20th. 2017 i received a letter that officially notified us the san francisco public of health commission is an accredited health department. [applause]. out of 3,000 health departments in the country less than 200 are

accredited within california we have nine local health departments, that are accredited with long beach san diego humboldt orange county pasadena venn tur yeah now san francisco and los angeles were accredited i wanted to thank all of the commissioners in the process and special shout out to karen pierce who is the coordinator she did an awesome. job cracking whip with the documentation. and april we will give you an official presentation and go over everything they said we are accredited for five years and continue to improve on. >> and i would like to acknowledge thomas aragon because he has kept this in the forefront of work and noticed the quality of improvement for the health department. thank you so much. [applause].

>> do we have any comments from the committee at this point? from the commission regarding this? >> congratulations well done. i know a lot of blood, sweat and tears went into this and a lot of heart congratulations everybody very cool. >> congratulation i was whispering if we have a higher score than los angeles. >> i don't know. [laughter] but we're actually very innovative we're doing really good stuff. >> further comments . >> congratulations i know this is a labor intensive work so congratulation of all the stachlt i have higher authority of my own that we did better than los angeles. [laughter]. >> dr. aragon thank you for your leadership and director garcia's

leadership is remarkable. >> closing comments, many many years ago, with the robert boid johnson foundation there were institutions given to me one of the thoughts was, wouldn't it be unique for the population cities increasing to have some sort of accreditation for the public health. the old public health hospital continually deal wg this issue this was years ago they gave additional moneys to get the process going. and let me just say, after all of these years and seeing the changes within this department over the last 20 years and the change of staff, the change of culture, the change of, we're all one

team, we are together, community partners you name the above. above all it takes a certain type of hereby and compassion and love on why we're doing this in order to validate the fact that these public health departments are second to none. and our people now who are leading this flagship are second to none. and dr. thomas and garcia and all the people involved, i mean, it's just a living testimony of passion and love for our community and people we serve by formally institutionalized a process that acknowledges again and again the beauty of it is, you have all set the inner mechanism so we will perpetuate as issues come in and you review it every year

comes before the commission. there are zoo many things that will be ongoing because they need changes here but the human variable is still the human variable thank god we have had the leadership and commitment that ewe have so the accreditation process is really a tribute to our outstanding professionals who have worked with san francisco patients and community. so thank you. thank you. thank you for a job well done. >> thank you again. and our performance model is, we will be the best at getting better. [laughter]. >> hold onto that positivity now we will have our policy deputy director kol lean talk about the health care act. >> good afternoon commissioners last health commission meeting i gave you a brief summy of the

health care act as proposed at the federal level i will give you an update to that presentation since then the congressional budget office has released it's score of the bill as it was introduced. and per the cbo, 14 million people enacted as it was introduced 14 million would lose health insurance beginning next year that would increase to 24 million who would lose access to health insurance by 2026. it would increase premiums anytime next few years then decrease them in the out years. and it would save about $337 billion to the federal government. so since that happened, it has also passed two policy committees and the house of representatives and the budget exity. i think mark up is in the rules committee occurred yesterday this would be

amendments to the bill designed to get sufficient votes to have it passed out of the house of representatives which is scheduled for a vote on thursday of this week. those amendments in addition to what i described previously at the last meeting would give states the flexibility to choose a block grant for medicaid per capita cap versus what is in the bill right now. it would remove expansion for states that didn't expand medicaid, california did but to expand medicaid between now and 2020. it would allow states to institute medicaid for work beneficiaries a matching percentage for implemented work requirements and increase the enflaegs factor for sub sidties that go to older adults i mentioned in the previous presentation the current version

of the american health care act would replace income based with age based subsidiys on the change this would increase the age based subsidies that is currently what is being discussed. also what is being discussed this may or may not they don't know yet have enough votes to get out of the house of representatives this week even so, face a battle in the senate. changes to the bill could occur in the senate at this time. most likely, will need changes if they were to be approved in the senate. that is pretty much what we know at the time. also, since your last meeting, the president issued his what they call a skinny budget. skinny budget is just the discretionary spending president has his authority it does not include entitlement programs like mktd and social security. in that, the health

and human services was decreased by 18%. the details where those decreases would be are not implemented in the budget there is not sufficient information at this time to know what the impact would be it does say support programs for community health centers but it doesn't say at what level. so more to come on that. >> we also will be presenting to the board on thursday the same presentation. a little bit different in the aspect that we really would like them to wait till the california state to advocate an all levels but we want to see what the state does on any local changes we have healthy san francisco without any type of funding force for that we will be in a struggle to continue to provide care for people we will continue to did the best the we under the circumstances. >> thank you very much. good

update. >> okay. also just to note i want to acknowledge the vision 0 staff here raise your hands are you going to be hearing about them today and want to acknowledge the great work they do in saving pedestrians lives and ensuring we have reductions in that area they're doing a great job there. if there are is any items that commission therapies would like to ask about and the aye testimonies in the directors report. >> thank you director garcia questions or comments? if not proceed next item please. >> item four is general public comment i have not received any requests so we can move onto including: sfhip children's oral health collaborative update and food security update and councilmember chung chair today. >> good afternoon commissioners i was sitting in for councilmember pating to chair the community and public health committee this afternoon and at

the committee, we had two updates one is cavity free children collaborative the other is from san francisco security task force. and both presentations are quite enlightning it's good to know that san francisco is kind of ahead in terms of reducing wasteful food and really making the effort to work with restaurants to make sure not too much of the food goes to waste. that is my update for now. any. >> thank you very much. questions or comments? if not we will proceed. >> >> item six >> item six for discussion: resolution in support of vision 0, the goal of 0

traffic deaths in san francisco by 2024, and the 2017-2018 review the draft resolution. a vote on the resolution will take place at the health commission april 18, 2017 meeting. . please note the vote on tple >> welcome again. >> thank you. director garcia acknowledging the vision 0 team and the excision ners for the opportunity to be here with an up combaet with the january presentation my name is megan wier for the program on health and co-chair also here today. in january we had preliminary data this slide depicts the final data for 2016. two people injured in traffic collisions people in the red killed in vehicle collisions the green people while biking and the blue

people while walking are the account total traffic fatalities for 2016 is at 30 we can see we're relatively flat in recent years we saw a decrease in pedestrian fatalities and increase in motor, vehicle. however it's notable. for motor vehicle three people were killed in one commission. our numbers being flat are in contrast to what we're seeing nationally i don't know if you have seen the recent headlines attention is given to the fact of 14% increase in traffic fatalities anytime united states in 2016 relative to 14 that is 10% of those deaths are occurring in california. the change is driven by increase to deaths to people walking biking and motorcycle that is a focus of vision 0 our

best practices here for the discussion for the vision 0 network. that said of course any traffic fatality there is really no excuse. so we're working hard to better understand traffic fatalities and inform targeted interventions to prevent them. last year we learned the medical cost of the severely traffic energid people is estimated to be 20% of the total cost of traffic collision and the third most collision are 70% of the cost. the aim is to reduce injury and the costs we're seeing with respect to who is most vulnerable people walking comprise 50% of the people killed seniors are a particularly vulnerable population this recent year they

comprised 2/3 of the pedestrian fatality we're grateful to them in the audience that is targeting this group. we know speeding is a leading prodikter whether or not you will be killed or severely injured and large vehicles are more deadly we also know or fatalities and injuries are highly concentrated on the vision 0 where mta is focusing their improvements that is 12% of where the fatal injuries ocurd. i'm thrilled to announce. the action strategy packet last week i will provide overview today. really focus of this strategy is identifying some of the key challenges since adopting vision 0 and articulating strategies to address those issues challenges

is the communities concern population of low income residents and seniors at higher risk through the data analysis we're hoping for a more increased focus with targeted interventions we have seen project opposition can result in fewer or delayed improvements particularly in the engineering world it focuses on best practices and community engagement and working across agencies to increase that throughout vision 0 projects. we also know we have a culture that prioritizes how fast we get some where versus how safely we get somebody that's why the aud hated speed enforcement and speeds campaign are key components of vision 0 i think we're all aware of the growing population and booming economy we have been seening in san francisco that highlights it's not only looking at the current patterns how can we predict

future injury hot spots and working with mta to develop predictive models if we're dpog to increase the number of people in an area car volume etcetera how can we predict future improvements to save lives also we know there is a lot that can be done within vehicle design to help save lives so we're working with the city administrators office to look at our our city vehicle fleet can be a model for best practices. as i mentioned we're elevating equity and community engagement in the strategities as well as assessing equity and being mindful with producing equities advancing new ones and key ones from the strategy i want to share where d ph is taking a

leadership role that includes continuing safe rules and streets for seniors and people with disabilities work. that is led by our community health equity and promotion branch also establishing a coordinated city response to help victims of faal crashes we met with bay area for safe streets that is a new advocate group formed by survivors and family members of people seriously injured or killed they brought to our attention. having a coordinated response at the scene. i'm exsided at the breadth of the dpah's action, to help ordinate with the da's office to make sure families are received services also continue to institutionally surveillance

sf.org system. working with general hospital on a regular basis in informing our work and conducting predictive model i mentioned and automaded speed enforcement legislation and we have been able to work with policy and planning to advance at a state level i'm excited to have the update here today that assembly man too introduces ab42 the state streets act of 2017 we were fortunate enough to have the media event in the lobby of the zuerberg city of san francisco hospital. [inaudible] welcomed everyone. we were able to have a trauma surgeon there speak to the impact of severe injuries and mayor lee and from

san jose spoke on this legislation the key framing to the advancement of this work is the public health policy. as we move forward, some details of the legislation that is via five year pilot deployed on the street where there is documented history of the speed related collisions the speeding is ten miles an hour over the posted speed limit it's $100 fine administrative penalty as opposed to something that goes on your driving record finally i wanted to end with the resolution. and open it to questions. thank you again. >> any public comment? >> no public comment request on this item. >> commission on this? we have the resolution voted upon the next - yes? >> i have one quick question i thought i heard correct me if

i'm wrong are you going to be engaging the crisis team to respond to folks who are - folks family who are survivors of victims or who have been killed k you say more about what that means and what role they're going to play. >> sure. those families of those killed addressing the needs in the short term. we're working with stephanie zelder in the crisis response team. they have a similar protocol for gun violence to working to expand that to gun fatalities when that occurs on the street it's not just the police that respond but also crisis response team as well as the da's office they have a victim service unit that is able to provide immediate financial assistance and other support. so we're excited about the opportunity to coordinate as

a city family to meet the acute needs of the victim in the immediate aftermath of fatality and provide the resources to connect them to services i wanted to acknowledge them for helping with that as well. >> thank you very much. additional comments or questions on this? i think there has been major major positive results just in focusing on this area and identifying certain area and following through whatever. i wanted to note in particular, especially cross zones we have one white line here both white lines crossing the street down the stool many have yellow ones across the stripes it makes a difference. for whatever reason drivers and bikers think about it, when they see kids or seniors crossing out in the

sunset or mission or south market or what have you it makes a big difference i encourage to expand that especially around school zones and sear yor crossings. the other place i was trying to remember and it goes right by our la goo na honda on the other side where you cross lagoona honda to get to the other side of the streetcars, that is going to be closed even though there are sign and whatever there, what happens is, we have noticed this often, senior that are handicapped will be walking to get to the streetcar line or leaving the streetcar line to get to the laguna honda. half way through the signal turns and they're standing out there in the middle of the cement block which is not

wide it looks like they're going to fall over and you are afraid you are going to hit them or whatever they hustle up. the same thing happens in the corner when it crosses over to go towards portula and straight up towards up to hcheriville and down again it's a cement block there people walk there and all of a sudden the light turns you are stuck there you got cars coming this way and this way i was wondering f we have creative students who would think about there's a button you can push to continue for ten seconds to get off that place you always worry something might happen. one more thing wtc on top of the hill. on the top of the intersection you have wtc at laguna honda you

have the muni buses they let the kids off when they let the kids off, they're half way down by wtc to get to the other side to get the buses going down many of the school kids they are kid they will cross. you have cars have a green arrow coming around they put on breaks and cars coming this way and the kid is there then you have seniors start to cross. before you know you think one day it's going to happen i don't know what we can do about it. if someone could look at that again because thee are areas close to our facilities where have accommodation bringing the kids or grandparents bringing the kids so forth you even have school kids crossing the other way to go to mctere or school of the arts they're standing closely on a very small piece

of, well, you just think my gosh, we're just a wing and a prayer we just hope that nothing happen again it's probably design but many of us have gone back there over the years and had our own kids go on the buses there get off or whatever think we have been fortunate there are not many kids hurt or scene years it has not changed much it's scary. >> yeah my colleagues in the audience is nodding. >> am i right or wrong? >> [speaking off the mic]. >> yeah. the changes have been great. you notice them in areas in the park people are aware of it. thank you very much for an update i'm glad we're still focusing on this very, very key area . >> thank for your support and thank you to the commission for your support for aud mated speed

enforcement as well. >> commissioners do you have questions between now and when the vote happens e-mail them to me and i forward them to mrs. wier. okay. thank you very much. next item. much. next item. >> item seven for discussion: sfdph revenue and expenditure report 2nd quarter fy 2016-2017. (greg wagner, sfdph cfo) the sfdph 2nd quarter revenue and expenditure report for fiscal year 2016-2017 will be presented. i will be pad passing out the presentation to you right now.

>> good afternoon commissioners greg wagner chief financial officers here to present to you the second quarter financial report for the current fiscal year we did talk about this at the meeting two weeks ac on the finance and planning committee in a little bit more detail at our last meeting in the committee report out was discussed there was a decision to move to cycle on the financial reports we do the first and third at the budget finance commit's, and second and 4th. quarters do it at the committee but have a presentation at the commission here as well. that is what we're doing here today. so, we are projecting second quarter report to end the year with a lynette $30 million general fund surplus we would be drawing $30 million

fewer in general fund subsidy anticipate nondeterminate the budget. included in the balance is $11.8 million which is the payment for the first year for the whole person care program which was adopted under the 1115 waver. since we put that report together, we received that payment and will have it refrekted at the division level in the next summary. so you can see here in our standard format, the projections were projecting $20.8 million surplus in revenues compared to budget $2.6 million overage in expenditures compared to budget. to go through at the division level, zucerberg san francisco general we're protecting $1.6 million surplus there ray few things moving at dsfg we

have additional revenue coming in under the 1115 waver compared to budget that is due to a couple of reasons some of it has to do with the federal dollars allocated to the program but also exceeding what we assumed in the budget for the amount that will draw down under the prime and gpp programs. so that is good news those efforts are going well. and we have some additional dollars coming in we have a lynette positive in our lynette patient revenues, that is fee for service revenue for medical medicare and others it looks like they're holding up strongly and improving a little bit since we put this projection together so there is additional upside there we have a shortfall

in capation revenues due to the reduction in rate from the san francisco health plan that within the into effect in the current year. salary and fridge we talked about this during the budget process there is overage in salary and fridge suspending, this is the result of having little more than half a year under our belt operating the new hospital when we went into the hospital we had projection and satisfying model based on the prework we had done as soon as you are actually in there on the ground you learn about what did or did not work in your hypothetical staffing model. and there are some areas in the hospital where expenditures are higher than anticipated we did in the budget submitted to the mayor's office with the commission's approval did include corrections for this

expenditure and we balanced around those corrections, so we think we should be in a good place to be back within budget within the coming year. operating transfers out is and i tem you see here. that is the intergovernmental transfer payment the county has to pay the non-federal share of revenues so gpp and prime line at top in order to draw those revenues, we need to put up an igt payment to draw them down so that offsets the lynette general fund impact of those revenues. at laguna honda hospital a $6 million surplus there is 4 million in revenue due to a higher than anticipated increase in the medical for diem. rate

for health savings health also has a small fridge savings in primary care we have $3.4 million surplus the bulk in the capation revenues. we have for the past couple of cycles had a surplus in this item. this is the share of the predominantly medicare and healthy workers, that gets carved out for primary care we also had and i tem in the budget increasing the revenue budget for capation revenues and primary care to reflect this actual experience jail health service has $0.5 million surplus in salary and fridge. and mental health we're projecting $3 million savings that is in contracts and that is really due to some one time close outs of prior year balances you tend to

see this more often in later nine month and year end financial reports we got a little bit of it we can reflect you can't identify accurately the variances and health revenues contracts until later in the year so it's fairly typical to see a modest variance report in the second quarter financial report for mental health. public health. dinot update that top line it's still got an old number in it. i will correct that but projecting 3.9 million in saving and salary fridge benefits both of that you will recall under the prior budget process we centralized a lot of administrative functions into the central administration division which is under public health it and human resources are the biggest of those two those used to be budgeted out in

the operating divisions and we took them all and put them in a central index code so they can be managed centrally. the bulk of that saving is due to positions adding as part of the initiatives ramping up to the electronic health system and the preparation work that is now beginning in advance of actually selecting a contractor so those are new positions that is taking us a little while to get caught up on hiring and we should see by theened of the year that will accrue some of the savings by the course of the year but will be closer to the annual budget so we're seeing progress on hiring there. when we have increase in staffing that is that large it takes a while for our system to get the gears

turning and really move through those large hiring efforts. substance abuse has a modest deficit. the biggest driver thank of that is we budgeted for the current year revenues due to the substance use waver. so, there are additional eligibility benefits for substance use under medicaid waver we budgeted revenue and expenditure against that revenue the implementation of that revenue has been slower than we thought so we're not realizing the revenue at the rate we anticipated at the budget we're revisiting that based on the time line to determine if we need to make modifications to next year's budget based on the change in schedule. so, a couple of just higher level points to make in

this report we have a couple of deficits that are primarily revenue driven and relatively small. we do have the issue of expenditures at san francisco general hospital which as i said we corrected in the budget year that is really due to this change in operating in the new hospital. and that is the first time in several years that we have had a negative variance there i think we have gotten ourselves into a place we have the ability to respond quickly to what we're seeing in the actuals at the hospital. despite that negative on the expenditures there, i feel pretty good about where we are compared to 4 or 5 years ago running persistent deficits and did not have a lot of tools available to either the finance division or operations respond quickly to what is happening

there. we're also doing well holding within budgets in the other division. so, i feel comfortable about where we are in terms of expenditure management and a good working relationship between the program and operation side and the management we have been making improvements in terms of the data made available to the operating divisions to give them tools to manage and we have more work to do, but i think we have seen quite a bit of progress on that front. as you will recall, two budgets ago, included in our budget that was adopted by the board provision that allows us to, if we have revenues excess revenues at the san francisco general and zuckerber laguna

honda transfer funds to the project as we're trying to map out or strategy for funding the project , that was a way that allowed us to capture good news for one time expenditure if we have it. that is still in our budget in this financial report assumes we do make the full $25 million transfer to the project. that is good news reduce the burden we had to put additional funding to the budget because we can do it this year instead so we are on track to have that funded and you will recall, we put additional $15 million appropriation in the second year into that project which keeps us on track with our projected funding need we will have to revise that once we select a vendor and develop the actual spending plan. all the surplus projected in

this report is in the controller six month report. controller does a citywide general fund report that is kind of like what we do here but is rolled up for the entire city. that report is published at the six month and ni nine month mash mark in the fiscal year the good news is it gets rolled into the city wise projections to offset the deficit for balancing for the upcoming budget cycle. so, we return those dollars to the general fund and a good portion of that ends upcoming back to us and having a lower target that we need to meet to help. the mayor's office balance the budget. so that is what i have for you now. we're always at the six month report able to make some projections but a lot usually changes between the 6

and 9 month report we are actually starting to work on right now it usually takes five or more months to get a clear picture overall, i think we're on target to have a good year and performance and i would expect that we probably have a little bit more upside prior to year you will see in the nine month record. there is nothing included this this report that has potential change in the governor's report project or projections that has not happens at the federal level but we're working with the mayor's office and the board and various organizations to monitor those and report on anything if needed. >> thank you very much.

commissioners? >> we discussed last time the finance and planning committee will be primarily the ones that will be getting the quarterly updates and for the second quarter and the 4th quarters they will come to the commission the full commission for presentation. that way, we can streamline some of these processes. >> thank you. any additional comments questions? thank for excellent update pertaining or - [inaudible]. >> thank you. >> no public comment for that item. item eight is other business. if there is none we can move onto conference committee reports the health commission will hear a brief summary of the march 14, 2017 lhh jcc meeting. commission councilmember sanchez you have report back for the march 14th. 2017 lhhjcc meeting.

>> this is the joint conference committee of lh our open session our committee review. the update on the planned discharged the lh team additional update on the status report. it was comprehensive and enheightening and showed the unique collaboration with the overall baselines of the department and how we're all working towards the same goals and outcomes the committee reviewed the administrator's report and approved hospital wise policy and procedures and the unique highlights within the administrative reports which is worth highlighting the closed session the committee approved. the medical staff approved the report per se. further addition by colleagues like to add if not, that would be the end of

the jcc report for laguna honda. >> move on? all right. item ten is the committee agenda setting if you have additional comments or questions please let me know. >> okay any items the commission wishes to bring or the director to bring to this item today? if not, i guess our next item would be a motion to adjourn. >> i move the adjourn. >> second. >> second. >> any discussion? no discussion. all in favor, please say, "aye." >> (multiple voices): aye. >> any opposed? the commission is here by adjourned. thank you very much. >> wow. this is the shortest meeting we have both been

through. [laughter]. (meeting adjourns.) commissio

wednesday, march 22, 2017 and the time is 5:03 pm. item 1, roll call. president cleaveland present, stephen nakajo present, michael hardeman present, nancy covington is here. chief of department joanne